Employees at the Environmental Protection Agency’s research campus in North Carolina are preparing to take on a new responsibility. Bring home lab rats as pets.
Or maybe some zebra fish.
Both animals have long been used at the E.P.A. facility to test the toxicity of chemicals. But as the E.P.A. shuts down its research arm as part of the Trump administration’s deep cuts to government scientific work, the animals need new homes.
So employees at the agency’s sprawling Research Triangle Park in North Carolina have set up an adoption plan, according to four people with knowledge of the program. Staff members can take home the rats or fish and keep them as pets.
“Adopt love. Save a life,” read a poster displayed on campus last week, according to a picture obtained by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, a nonprofit that provides legal assistance to government workers who speak out on environmental issues. “Would you like to adopt?”
According to an email sent Tuesday by Maureen R. Gwinn, acting assistant administrator of E.P.A.’s Office of Research and Development, the program has started accepting applications, though adoptions were on a temporary hold as the agency considered the adoption criteria.
The E.P.A. works with about 20,000 animals, one of the people said, a vast majority of which are fish or fish larvae. Two rabbits also remained on the North Carolina campus until recently, the person said, but they have now been adopted.
The agency said the adoptions were unrelated to the funding cuts. Instead, they were driven by concerns over animal welfare, said Brigit Hirsch, the press secretary. “The Trump E.P.A. is working to get as many of the animals into loving homes as possible,” she said.
The federal government has indeed faced a yearslong campaign by activists to stop the use of animals in testing. Ending the practice has emerged as a conservative cause supported by people who say taxpayer dollars should not be funding such research, and the Trump administration has been sympathetic.
Still, the move away from animal testing comes at a time when the agency has proceeded with plans to eliminate its scientific research arm, cutting back on chemists, biologists, toxicologists and other scientists.
In May, the agency said in an email that it would wind down what would have been a multiyear, $8 million contract for animal testing services, approving only a monthlong extension to allow for adoptions of the lab animals.
That is one of many grants the Trump administration has moved to terminate in the name of cost savings, including ones funding climate, environmental justice and children’s health programs.
Experts expressed concern that the wider consequences of a rapid shutdown of animal testing would imperil the E.P.A.’s work. “I’m absolutely supportive of the E.P.A. moving away from animal testing,” said Paul A. Locke, a professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health who specializes in environmental health, laboratory animal law and non-animal-based toxicity testing.
But “they still have to protect us against chemicals in the environment,” he said. And while scientists have made progress on testing methods that don’t rely on animals, “we just don’t have all of the alternatives that we need right now.”
The rat and fish adoption program was pushed for by staff members so that animals there could avoid the fate of lab animals at other agencies that have been killed as the Trump administration has slashed funding, one of the people with knowledge of the program said.
An application form circulated among employees and reviewed by The Times listed requirements for potential new rat or fish parents: They must have the consent of all adult members of their household, they must establish a relationship with a veterinarian to provide care and they must provide proper animal transport equipment.
The E.P.A. declined to give more details on the program.
Animal rights groups have pushed for years to eliminate animal testing at federal agencies. In recent years, a new kind of group has played a pivotal role in transforming animal testing into a right-wing cause. The White Coat Waste Project, started by a conservative activist who previously worked on campaigns to defund Planned Parenthood and to end the Affordable Care Act, has spearheaded that effort, calling for an end to animal testing programs across federal agencies.
The group worked with the first Trump administration to secure a commitment to eliminate tests on dogs, rabbits and all other mammals by 2035, and to retire former animal testing subjects. That effort slowed under President Biden, who prioritized research. Now, with President Trump back in office, the effort is back on track, the group says.
“We’re proud of our hard-fought win, and we won’t stop until the last animal is out,” said Justin Goodman, who leads the group’s advocacy and public policy. Taxpayers should not be forced to pay for something they don’t like or need, the group says. (It does not campaign against private animal research.)
But experts say animal testing remains a cornerstone of research into toxic chemicals. And while non-animal methods exist for testing the effects of chemicals on human skin or eyes, testing for more complex outcomes, such as cancer or developmental or reproductive issues, is harder to perform without animals.
Lab animals are also used to establish lethal doses, a basic measure that determines concentrations at which a toxic chemical is lethal to 50 percent of a test population.
Still, most rats at the E.P.A. are sentinel rats, which are used to test for less lethal environmental exposure. “They just hang out,” said Paula Clifford, executive director of Americans for Medical Progress, a nonprofit that advocates the responsible use of animals in research. “Researchers might check their fecal matter,” she said, or “they might take some blood, and then they test that to see, are there any contaminants in the environment?”
Shutting that research down without developing alternatives could not only risk public health, she said, but could also make E.P.A. scientists more dependent on industry research and less able to verify the safety of chemicals.
Despite E.P.A. staff members’ efforts, some lab animals may not be suitable for adoption. Ones that have been genetically modified or have certain diseases aren’t up for grabs, a person with knowledge of the adoption program said.
Ms. Hirsch, the E.P.A. press secretary, said that animals “ineligible for adoption due to their exposure to harmful pollutants will be given humane end-of-life care.”
As for eligible rats, they make great companions, according to Ms. Clifford, who said she had adopted many former lab residents. “If you can convince people to have rodents in their homes, they’re wonderful pets.”
Maxine Joselow contributed reporting from Washington.
Hiroko Tabuchi covers pollution and the environment for The Times. She has been a journalist for more than 20 years in Tokyo and New York.
The post E.P.A. Employees Are Invited to Adopt Soon-to-Be Homeless Lab Rats appeared first on New York Times.
