Schools Animal Ethics Committee (SAEC) Western Australia Julie Hitchens Category B  BSocSci Anthropology (Hons)(Curtin)  PGradDipOccHlthSfty (Curtin)  Dip. Lab Practices (TAFE)  Dip. Animal Technology (TAFE)

In 2003, the Department of Education and Training (DET) established the SAEC consistent with the requirements of the State's Animal Welfare Act (2002) (the Act) and the Code of practice for the care and use of animals for scientific purposes (NHMRC 2004) (the Code).

 An agreement was reached that the SAEC would also serve as the Animal Ethics Committee for the Association of Independent Schools of WA (AISWA) and the Catholic Education Office (CEO), undertaking the same role for them as it does with the Department. The SAEC acknowledges that it is an ongoing process with continuous improvement within the areas of proposal and reporting forms (different versions of proposal forms for TAFE WA, agricultural colleges and schools), compliance requirements and site visits.

C hairperson – Executive Director, School Support Programs DET.  2 x Category A - Veterinarians  5 x Category B – Science teacher, Senior Laboratory Technician, TAFE lecturer, CEO officer, Agriculture officer,  2 x Category C – Retired Vet, RSPCA Councillor  3 x Category D – 2 Retired persons and a Physiotherapist  3 x Executive officers - from each system or sector

The composition, dynamics, content and operation of the SAEC contributed to the educative nature of SAEC meetings. Specific examples include a Category A member presenting a session on low stress stock handling which resulted in the production of professional development of agriculture college staff. A Category A member provided advice about animal management issues such as euthanasia of fish.

At SAEC meetings, debate and discussion about complex issues is educative. Committee members use electronic mail to respond to questions of clarification from executive officers A Category C member raised issues and provided advice about the Act and the Code and coordinated the refinement of the file advice related to fish.

They increase SAEC members' understanding of the breadth and depth of the educational program and the nature and quality of the facilities that support the program and they increase host organizations knowledge of the SAEC. In 2007, four of the nine SAEC meetings were held on an educational site. The meetings were followed by a conducted site tour. The site visits served two purposes.

Monitoring and Compliance School principals are responsible for ensuring compliance with the SAEC Guidelines for the care and use of animals in Western Australian schools and agricultural and TAFEWA colleges (2005). The SAEC guidelines have been developed to assist schools and colleges to comply with the Animal Welfare Act (2002) and the National Health and Medical Research Council’s Code of Practice for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes (2004)

A four-year staged implementation negotiated with the Manager and Scientific Inspector, Animal Welfare, DLG&RD was to result in the full operation of the SAEC in However, the enormity of the task of making administrators and the relevant staff aware of compliance requirements will be achieved over time using multi­ dimensional methods of communication. The SAEC continues to play an important educative role in this process.

The SAEC defined five categories of animal use.  Category 1 Observational studies of animal use involving no direct contact by students.  Category 2Basic handling, feeding and care of animals e.g. classroom pet. No breeding except fish.

 Category 3Minor conscious disruption to animal's condition or behaviour e.g. incubating and hatching chicken eggs.  Category 4Normal animal husbandry procedures with recovery.  Category 5Activities requiring the death of the animal e.g. rat dissection.

Category 3, 4 and 5 teaching activities require a formal written proposal to be submitted to the SAEC. In some instances schools still submit Category 1 and 2 proposals for SAEC approval or when they are unsure about the category of activity, the proposal is submitted for discussion by the SAEC. A single proposal may include several categories of animal use. The majority of secondary science proposals are for rat dissections (student to rat ratio is 3 to 1).

May be;  Approved  Approved with conditions  Referred back to the applicant for resubmission  Declined with reasons outlined Proposal Submissions

 Approval can be given for up to 3 years.  SAEC needs to be notified (in writing) of any variation in activity, including staff changes.

SAEC Educational Activities  Conference and meeting attendance and reporting or presenting to the SAEC about relevant information  Attending ANZCCART conferences;  Presented a talk at the Voiceless Symposium;  Chaired a session of Animal Ethics at the World Conference on Science and Technology;  Attending each WA Animal Ethics Group (WAAEG) Meeting

In , professional development workshops for teachers and laboratory technicians were held at various locations around the state by representatives from the SAEC to assist them to: Gain a greater understanding of sound animal welfare practices Explore teaching strategies that may be used when dealing with ethical, welfare and legal issues related to the use of animals in agriculture Become familiar with a variety of online resources suitable for use in teaching agriculture

Refinement and documentation of administrative processes  A map of the organizational structure for the management of the SAEC was developed with the roles and responsibilities documented;  A SAEC induction manual was produced and distributed to new members.

 Standard operating procedures for managing submitted animal Health Forms C1 and C2 and for dealing with non- compliance with the Australian Code of Practice For the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes (NHMRC, 2004) were developed;  The revision of the forms that make up the SAEC Guidelines for the care and use of animals in Western Australian schools and agricultural colleges and TAFEWA colleges was educative for both long-serving and new SAEC members.

Conclusion  There is a growing awareness of the role of the Schools Animal Ethics Committee.  The SAEC chair acknowledges the expertise, commitment and contribution of each member of the SAEC. While there were some changes in the committee, SAEC members have found excellent replacements for retiring members.

 The SAEC appreciates the on-going assistance it receives from the Department of Local Government and Regional Development (DLGRD).