論水產實驗動物權利之保障

A Study on the Protection of Animal’s Right in Aquatic Experiment

10.6509/TLM.2017.6805.05

蔡達智(Dennis Tsai)

實驗動物 ； 水產實驗動物 ； 動物保護 ； 動物福利 ； 動物權 ； Laboratory Animal ； Aquatic Laboratory Animal ； Animal Protection ； Animal Welfare ； Animal Rights

法令月刊

68卷5期（2017 / 05 / 01）

108 - 129

繁體中文

以憲法保障的學術自由進行的動物實驗，晚近因遭逢動物保護思潮興起，自由度有所折衷。不論是從實驗室內部自律審查動物實驗、實驗動物必要資訊公開、照養醫療實驗動物的義務責任，最小侵害實驗原則到人道處遇終結水產實驗動物生命，每一項抽象的管制原則，似乎都讓高舉學術自由保障的動物實驗，保有相當高度的自由。相對於動物福利與權利處於弱勢中的弱勢的水產實驗動物，想來應逐步朝向更合理的保護管制措施。在眾多如實驗動物來源、醫藥照護、人道處遇等應改善的實驗動物保護管制措施當中，最方便的方法之一便是公開動物實驗必要的資訊，藉以檢視實驗合法性進而修正不合時宜的法令規範。期間雖有困難，如果不願意讓動物保護團體人士參與任何管制與審查過程，公開資訊會成為最後且唯一的手段，否則將會導致空有實驗動物的動物保護法令，實際上猶如美麗但不切實際的法律文字，只會容易引來不必要的誤解、不認識等非理性的對立衝突。

The experimental animal shall be protected but compromised with the right to freedom of research under the Constitutional Law. From the peer review of processing animal experiments inside the labs to the freedom of information of animal and the best care and hospitality to the testing animals, every single rule and regulation seemly have some space to be improved. We should pay more attention and improve the reasonable measurements to the laboratory aquatic animals as they may not attract too much concerns for their proper welfare protection. Among all the possible improvement for the welfare cares, one of the most important method is, getting the necessity lab’s information. By this way, the open lab’s information could let all the people, including the groups of animal protection, to check out whether the labs exercise the due process for the testing animal under the animal protection law. This would be a hard work but worthy to pay for it. Otherwise, the animal protection law may be lip service only without any force but leading conflicts caused by misunderstandings among people and professional experts.

1. 賴治民(2014)。獸醫公共衛生政策執行與動物福利。應用倫理評論，56，45-58。
   連結：
2. 賴治民(2014)。獸醫公共衛生政策執行與動物福利。應用倫理評論，56，45-58。
   連結：
3. 杜金蓮(2013)，〈實驗動物法規與照 護管理之注意事項〉，《行政院農 業委員會水產試驗所電子報》，88 期，http://www.tfrin.gov.tw/friweb/frienews/enews0088/p2.html( 最後瀏覽日:2017/4/19)。
4. Association of Zoos and Aquariums (n.d.), About AZA Accreditation, https://www.aza.org/what-is-accreditation/ (last visited: 2017/4/19).
5. 社團法人台灣動物平權促進會(n.d.)， 《 反 動 物 實 驗 》，http://taeanimal.org.tw/action-and-sound/anti-animal-testing.html(最後瀏覽日: 2017/4/19)。
6. 許晉榮(2013)，〈他山之石:國外實 驗動物法保護下的頭足類〉，《行政院農業委員會水產試驗所電子報》， 84 期，http://www.tfrin.gov.tw/friweb/frienews/enews0084/p2.html (最後瀏覽日:2017/4/19)。
7. 社團法人台灣動物社會研究會(2013)， 《動物實驗 — 必要之惡?農委會 狂犬病動物實驗核准依據為何?檢視台灣動物實驗監督管理五大漏洞杜絕浮濫之惡》，http://www.east. org.tw/that_content.php?s_id=7&m_ id=49&id=455(最後瀏覽日: 2017/4/19)。
8. 動物解放(2015)，《「麻煩貓」動物 實驗(中文字幕)》，https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0kKOi_ZmHg(最後瀏覽日:2017/4/19)。
9. The Farm Animal Welfare Committee (2009), Five Freedoms, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20121007104210/http:/www.fawc.org.uk/freedoms.htm (last visited: 2017/1/23).
10. Benson, Tess (2004), Advancing Aquaculture: Fish Welfare at Slaughter, Winston Churchill Memorial Trust, http://seafood.oregonstate.edu/.pdf%20Links/Fish%20Welfare%20at%20Slaughter%20by%20Tess%20Benson%20-%20Winston%20Churchill%20Memorial%20Trust.pdf (last visited: 2017/4/19).
11. Walker, Sally (n.d.), Australia Zoo and Related Legislation, http://zooreach.org/ZooLegislation/Australia/Introduction.pdf (last visited:2017/4/19).
12. Stevenson, M. F., & Turner, D. (2006), Zoo Debate, Animal Liberation Front.com, http://www.animalliberationfront.com/Practical/Entertainment/ZooDebate.htm (last visited: 2017/4/19).
13. Ashley, Paul J.(2007).Fish welfare: Current issues in aquaculture.Applied Animal Behaviour Science,104(3-4),199-235.
14. Bayne, K.(Ed.),Turner, P. V.(Ed.)(2013).Laboratory Animal Welfare.New York:Academic Press.
15. Branson, Edward J.(Ed.)(2008).Fish Welfare.Oxford:Blackwell.
16. Burke, Katherine A.(2005).Looking for a nexus between trust, compassion, and regulation: Colorado's search for standards of care for private, nonprofit wildlife sanctuaries.Animal Law Review,12(1),39-70.
17. Carbone, Larry(2004).What Animals Want: Expertise and Advocacy in Laboratory Animal Welfare Policy.New York:Oxford University Press.
18. Charrow, Robert P.(2010).Law in the Laboratory: A Guide to the Ethics of Federally Funded Science Research.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.
19. Cooke, S. J.,Nguyen, V. M.,Murchie, K. J.,Thiem, J. D.,Donaldson, M. R.,Hinch, S. G.,Brown, R. S.,Fisk, A.(2013).To tag or not to tag: Animal welfare, conservation, and stakeholder considerations in fish tracking studies that use electronic tags.Journal of International Wildlife Law & Policy,16,352-374.
20. DeTolla, L. J.,Srinivas, S.,Whitaker, B. R.,Andrews, C.,Hecker, B.,Kane, A. S.,Reimschuessel, R.(1995).Guidelines for the Care and Use of Fish in Research.ILAR Journal,37(4),159-173.
21. Eşanu, V. O.,Gavriloaie, C.,Oroian, I. G.,Burny, P.(2015).Few remarks regarding some unnatural aquarium fish breeds and improper fish maintenance.Aquaculture, Aquarium, Conservation & Legislation,8(2),236-243.
22. Francione, Gary L.(2008).Animal as Persons.New York:Columbia University Press.
23. Gillespie, Alexander(2003).Humane killing: A recognition of universal common sense in international law.Journal of International Wildlife Law & Policy,6,1-29.
24. Hill, Michael(2010).The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act: The need for a whistleblower exception.Case Western Reserve Law Review,61(2),649-678.
25. Kelch, Thomas G.(2001).Animal experimentation and the First Amendment.Western New England Law Review,22(2),467-501.
26. Kleveland, Live(2008).To save lab animals the legal way: The right to appeal on permits to perform animal experiments.Journal of Animal Law,4,99-103.
27. Knight, Andrew(2011).The Costs and Benefits of Animal Experiments.New York:Palgrave.
28. Kornfield, Aaron(2006).An elephant never forgets: Pachyderms, politics, and policy at the San Francisco Zoo.Journal of Animal Law and Ethics,1,205-220.
29. Liebmann, Larissa U.(2014).Fraud and First Amendment protections of false speech: How United States v. Alvarez impacts constitutional challenges to Ag-Gag laws.Pace Environmental Law Review,31(2),566-593.
30. Monamy, Vaughan(2000).Animal experimentation: A guide to the issues.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
31. Moore, Andrew,Ireland, N.(2005).Caging animal advocates' political freedoms: The unconstitutionality of the animal and ecological terrorism act.Animal Law Review,11,255-282.
32. Mustapha, Moshood K.(2014).Aquaculture and Fish Welfare: Are the Rights of Fish Compromised?.Zoologica Poloniae,59,49-68.
33. Natterson-Horowitz, Barbara、Bowers, Kathryn、陳筱宛譯(2013)。共病時代：醫師、獸醫師、生態學家如何合力對抗新世代的健康難題。臺北:臉譜。
34. Ostrander, Gary K.(Ed.)(2000).The Laboratory Fish.London:Elsevier.
35. Schaffner, Joan E.(2011).An Introduction to Animals and the Law.New York:Palgrave Macmillan.
36. Schrengohst, Karina L.(2011).Animal Law - Cultivating Compassionate Law: Unlocking the Laboratory Door and Shining Light on the Inadequacies & Contradictions of the Animal Welfare Act.Western New England Law Review,33(3),855-900.
37. Swanson, Katharine M.(2002).Carte blanche for cruelty: The non- enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act.University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform,35(4),937-968.
38. Use of Fishes in Research Committee Committee,American Fisheries Society,American Institute of Fishery Research Biologists,American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists(2014).Guidelines for the Use of Fishes in Research.Maryland:American Fisheries Society.
39. Waisman, S. S.(Ed.),Frasch, P. D.(Ed.),Wagman, B. A.(Ed.)(2006).Animal Law: Cases and Materials.Durham:Carolina Academic Press.
40. 石田戢(2010)。日本の動物園。東京:東京大?出版?。
41. 李鑑慧(2012)。由「棕狗傳奇」論二十世紀初英國反動物實驗運動策略之激進化。新史學，23(2)，155-215。
42. 蔡達智(2014)。水產養殖動物保護及其權利。興大法學，16，119-164。
43. 蔡達智(1996)。從學術自由與大學自治應有之取向評釋司法院釋字第三八○號解釋。憲政時代，21(4)，46-67。
44. 蔡懷楨(2006)。生物醫學研究的新材料：基因轉殖魚。中華實驗動物學會會訊，19，6-24。
45. 衛生福利部食品藥物管理署(2014)。藥品非臨床試驗安全性規範。
46. 謝幸芳(2013)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立中興大學法律學系科技法律碩士班。
47. 饒心儀(2014)。實驗動物在台灣—淺談台灣實驗動物保護運動及法規制度。弘誓雙月刊，127，42-47。
48. 浅川千尋(2008)。国家目標規定と社会権─環境保護、動物保護を中心に。東京:日本評論社。

1. 蔡達智(2019)。動物園資訊公開管制規範之探討－最高行政法院101年度判字第171號判決評釋。高大法學論叢，15(1)，31-35+37+39。
2. 蔡達智(2019)。智慧農業資訊管制規範之研究。華岡法粹，67，85-139。